frodopogo wrote:Apple proved that creative right-brained people DO NOT want to use the command line

Have you ever worked (IT-wise!) with a Mac? You would know that is wrong.Even on a bling-bling Mac most things are done best on CLI.

Anyway, most of you guys seem to think in black and white. GUI or CLI. You are mistaken. It is GUI and CLI on all systems out there.Some things (video editing) are best done with a GUI, others (automatizing your system, sending short mails , ...) are best done in the terminal. This applies to all major operating systems - even to Windows.

I think one common characteristic among linux users is patience. There is a learning curve for new users you can't just call 24/7 customer support to get someone to give you instant gratification everytime something goes wrong.

Linux users ahve to google. Linux users have to register on forums, post their questions and their questions have intelligently written, and they have to wait and hope someone answers and they have to be open that they may not get the answer they were hoping for and that still might not solve the problem.

It takes work to learn Linux and although there is nothing theoretically wrong with work, not everyone is willing to do the work that it takes to be a skilled Linux user who takes advantages that Linux genuinely has to offer.

My favorite program for recoloring old photos is "Recolored" [just one of the programs I use]. I would love to have more creative programs for Linux. I have "Recolored" running on WINE so I have it working for me. But for a person new to Linux they would even know that it worked in WINE or for that matter what WINE is. I use GIMP with G"MIC to tweak photos first then to tweak them more. But like was said before, you have to research to find things out. I like "Paint Shop Pro" but I have version 9 working in WINE because with all the crap written in software now that automatically assumes you a bootlegger, I haven't tried my copy of version X3. Applications is the big thing in this IMHO and not really the OS, It's just finding away of making Linux a viable OS to market software for to the software manufacturers. Until that happens there is going to be a problem. A $30 program like "Recolored" is worth it's weight in gold for what it does, but most people even using Windows don't even know it's there and it was written for Windows. If I was Corel I'd be scarfing this one up and adding it to the Paint Shop Pro Suite then increase the price. Yes, a little Bill Gates in all of us.

frodopogo wrote:Apple proved that creative right-brained people DO NOT want to use the command line

Have you ever worked (IT-wise!) with a Mac? You would know that is wrong.Even on a bling-bling Mac most things are done best on CLI.

Anyway, most of you guys seem to think in black and white. GUI or CLI. You are mistaken. It is GUI and CLI on all systems out there.Some things (video editing) are best done with a GUI, others (automatizing your system, sending short mails , ...) are best done in the terminal. This applies to all major operating systems - even to Windows.

Funny, I did Pascal and C++ programming on the MAC for a least a decade, without CLI. CLI is for programmer with no-sense of ergonomic.

Oh,Come on now cut and paste is ergonomic too. I can remember having to rewrite a whole subroutine because of an error in one line. Cut and paste would have been great back then. Come to think of it that's why I started stacking subroutines was because I didn't have cut and paste. I loved when I found the program "Sidekick" and learned I could use it to create batch files.

Asimov wrote:He forgot one think: be force to reinstall every 3 years. Just when thing run finally smoothly . You are force to open a new can of worm.

Ummm, I used to reinstall windows every month or 2 for various reasons. One of the main reasons I switched to linux. And guess what? There are new versions of windows every couple of years now. Pulease.

Plus, you make it sound like reinstalling every few years is such a hardship.

I for one, like new shiny new releases. Keeping the same install for 5 years is out of the question. I am not a corporation that needs the same OS for years. I am a regular computer user that plays music, surfs, gimp, and most other everyday tasks.

You want to install program A. When trying to install it, you're told that program A needs program B and file X to work. You spend a good amount of time looking all over the internet for program B and file X. Then you install file X and try to install program B and you're told that program B needs program C and files Y and Z to work.

Then you spend, again, a good amount of time on the internet looking for files Y and Z and program C. You find the files, install file Y and try to install file Z. When installing, you're told that file Z conflicts with file W that is already installed on your system. When trying to remove file W, you're told that your favorite program, program D, needs file W in order to work. If you remove file W, you must also remove progam D and all the other files and programs that need them.

You're also trying to install program C that was needed in order to install program B. You're told that program C needs the libraries of Desktop Environment Q, and that you have those libraries but they're too old so you need to upgrade them. If you upgrade, your Desktop Environment Q and all the programs integrated with it stop working unless you upgrade them, too.

It's not really like this, but it seems this way sometimes, when you are new here.

It is exactly like this. This is the very reason, why I never got involved with Linux development (I mean the system itself or one of open source applications that run on it). The dependency hell puts me off every time I download the source code of a project and prevents me from getting involved with it. Some projects have instructions, how to compile the source, but they never work. I always encounter a dependency I am unable to satisfy and have to give up. I am left with tons of garbage, I installed trying to make it work. Even if something is packaged and one only wants to get a binary (because some critical bug was fixed upstream), installing it is sometimes impossible. I encountered this situation with Wine once. A new version of an application should not force one to reinstall the OS, this is sick. I can only justify this, if the change inside the OS is huge. (For example I accept the fact that a Windows program won't run under DOS, or that Linux users who still use kernel 1.0 may have some trouble, but thats it).

I can see why dependencies are a hassle but I give up on the program I am trying to install before I would give up on the distro, not to even mention Linux as a whole.

I personally came to Linux cause I got sick of updating the anti virus and purchasing programs to speed up Windows 7. Enough was enough.

And on top of it all Windows was too slow booting up and updating. And I can go on.

I think people who give up on Linux have money to spend on Windows. Whenever I meet someone who uses Windows I already know they have a descent amount of savings in the bank and they do not want to learn anything on their own and want quick answers from paid customer service tech support.

I dont have a history of wanting to work for individuals like that cause they really do not have any patience and want proven stability.

The PC desktop ultimately has it's limits and speed and power is really the only criteria left as a legitimate variable.

There is still a healthy demand for fancy desktop customization but it eventually gets old and once you have the "perfect setup" then speed becomes the number one issue.

Whatever the purpose you have for owning a computer the faster and more powerful the cpu the more time you have to think about other stuff.

Also the open source community is starting to catch up to the functionality of proprietary software and if you are unafraid to learn the ins and outs of specific software you are interested in, expensive proprietary software and the money you pay for it gets old too.

I think it is about how far ahead do you want to invest in the future.

The future is good for open source cause those who invest in learning the basics of Linux will always have an edge on those who are crossing their fingers that Windows 8 doesnt turn into another Vista catastrophe.

People give up on Linux cause they can either afford too or are unsure of the long term benefits.

I think once people have to deal with Windows 8, they won't be so quick to give up on linux. I used the latest release preview (which is the last one before the final release) for a week just to try it. It's a total nightmare to anyone who prefers the traditional desktop...It even makes Unity look conservative lol.

As a Noob linux user ,couple months , i can tell you right off whatmy issues were. And im only listing my hassles, not princess.

I suspect that as time goes on i will forget the initial issues i had and wonder what all the fuss was about, and i suspect that goes for most,but maybe the powers that be , ie the good people developing and making the distributions available, need to look at these reasons.

anywaynetworking,file shares,partitioning(default one partition as well as asking a noob to do stuff with sda and root and ext, is scary stuff ),wireless drivers,installing software.

I would say from personal experience, get the first 3 working out the box, and the "give up" rate would be less.

Once in a while I like to come back to this thread and read the opinion of you guys. Of course this is often triggered by my own experiences running into obstacles - something that still happens after 2 years with Linux (Yeah, I know - I'm quite still "young".)

Anyway - A new observation for now is:

- To many compromises.

Let me elaborate:

The other day I decided that I wanted to start over with a new, fresh install for my primary home computer. So far I'm running an install of LMDE x64 on it - I've had that same install for a bit over a year now. I am running Cinnamon as a DE and everything seems to be working just like I want (more or less - there are some tiny things I can live with.). Even so I decided on trying Maya - same DE and also the x64 version.

So I ran my install, and: - Knowing that Maya is still at Kernel 3.2.x I also added Kernel 3.4 to that install - the reason for that is that my TV-card isn't supported in kernels before 3.3. Everything seemed to work ok at first, but...- This created a problem when I wanted to use Jockey to install Nvidia drivers - I don't know for sure, but it seems like Jockey don't like the new kernel.- So I went for sgfxi instead, just as I do in LMDE. One down, a "a few more to go..." This seemed to work ok at first, but...- Next up was Playonlinux. This I "want" for running Microsoft Office - I'm not saying that Libreoffice is bad, I'm just too old to start learning yet another solution from the start (I feel I have enough moving from Lightroom to either Darktable or Aftershot pro) The problem here is that Playonlinux can't seem to find any x86 libs for OpenGL (don't remember the expression) which it tells me is needed if I ever want to enjoy any of my GOG's. I searched the forum and tried adding multiarch. I also found a thread recommending removing the Nvidia drivers from Nvidia and use the ones from Jockey instead. - Well... that kind of pulled me back a few steps - to right after I realized Jockey don't like my new Kernel (or so I believe).

So now... without being too proficient solving the above, I've taken myself all the way back to thinking aobut starting over from the beginning again - this time with the x86 version of a Cinnamon-spiced Maya and a pae-kernel. (That was two days running between a sick daughter and my computer that I won't get back)

All the above I can deal with only because I just don't feel good about going back to Windows again, but I imagine that I'd probably turned my back to run away if I've had that happen to me just when I made the move two years ago...

About the new kernel and proprietary drivers, you need newer driver versions if you have a newer kernel. You can add this PPA for newer proprietary drivers, then Jockey should work with any newer kernel as well: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-x-swat/+archive/x-updates(AMD users may sometimes need to wait, AMD is often late supporting new kernels)

Registered Linux User #528502Feel free to correct me if I'm trying to write in Spanish, French or German.

AlbertP wrote:About the new kernel and proprietary drivers, you need newer driver versions if you have a newer kernel. You can add this PPA for newer proprietary drivers, then Jockey should work with any newer kernel as well: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-x-swat/+archive/x-updates(AMD users may sometimes need to wait, AMD is often late supporting new kernels)

Tried that one and got presented with an error that directed me to a log that looked like it could probably be turned into a book thicker than a "standard" bible... - So I went back to my idea with sgfxi.

As jmcook79 hints at, although not clearly enough, the issue here has expanded to be Windoze vs Linux.

The traditional desktop was hard enough to get a Windows XP user over to Ubuntu Gnome desktop. Many users refused to open their minds and realise the buttons say different things on them, even if Clem went and put the taskbar and buttons in roughly the same place (over vanilla ubuntu)

Now with Windows 8 and Unity, us Linux Mint users who have continued with the traditional desktop style may have to realise that in a year or so, most of the new generation of Windoze users will become used to Windows 8's interface.

So, how apart is Unity from W8?

And how much further is LM's choices of desktops from W8? Can we ever hope to attract new users when all they've experienced is W8?

Asimov wrote:He forgot one think: be force to reinstall every 3 years. Just when thing run finally smoothly . You are force to open a new can of worm.

Ummm, I used to reinstall windows every month or 2 for various reasons. One of the main reasons I switched to linux. And guess what? There are new versions of windows every couple of years now. Pulease.

Plus, you make it sound like reinstalling every few years is such a hardship.

I for one, like new shiny new releases. Keeping the same install for 5 years is out of the question. I am not a corporation that needs the same OS for years. I am a regular computer user that plays music, surfs, gimp, and most other everyday tasks.

That's the problem. You're a windows user. Your expectation are low!

On a Mac, upgrading is like installing in application in Windows. That's all! The funny thing is that BSD OS are able to do that for at least 3 decades. You don't change your monitor, you don't change your keyboards, etc. In practice, all the the configuration of your machine is already inside your hard-drive. there's no need for an human intervention.

My problem is not the upgrading, my problem is no one make it easy. if upgrading every 6 months become the standard, it's time to come with something more smart than the actual system. You know the swap partition is now so big that is possible to put inside a mini version of Linux with a small desktop ...